Talk:Ross (bicycle company)

I am not sure why someone tagged this with a notability tag. Ross bicycles are pretty well known in the U.S. There is no reason for the tag. I propose that it be removed. --Tainter 00:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I just came across this site while trying to find out info on Ross Bikes. I am pretty sure that wikipedia served the function it was intended for here. Had the page been deleted due to "notability" . I would not have been able to find the info I was looking for. AJseagull1 (talk) 23:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, most of the content on this page is a copyright violation of and will probably have to be removed. But, that also means that Wikipedia is not the only source for this information. Jfire (talk) 20:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Those violations should now all be cleared up. -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:48, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Contested deletion

 * This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... the page content does not steal from the link provided. Many of the same facts are discussed, but that site is a forum written by individuals recounting the facts of this company's history. Also the page has been on Wikipedia for over 6 years, this is not a Speedy Delete candidate. —     Bill W.     (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 13:32, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


 * The page has been rewritten from scratch using only a few details from the provided sources. The ample reliable sources establish notability. -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:48, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It indeed appeared as if much of the content was copied from an online chat forum. The article's longevity doesn't mitigate copyright concerns, nor neutralize the validity of the speedy rationale. All that said, it doesn't matter anymore: AndrewDressel has done a great job saving the article. Kudos. 99.149.85.229 (talk) 15:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Self declared conflict of interest
Bikeguy1, You openly cited a conflict of interest, here. You need to understand that no editor may add edits to an article based on the presumption that that editor is -- for instance -- a fourth generation family member of the Ross family (as you suggest). All editors must provide bona fide sources. The premise is that people who are too close to the subject of the article, such as in your case, will not edit articles, but will rather openly declare a conflict of interest and engage in meaningful discussion on the article's talk page. Please read wp:coi and understand you run the risk of being blocked if you don't comply. In the meantime, I will revert the article to a place before you edited.842U (talk) 01:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Understood, I'll ask non-business or family related individuals online to verify the company is in business and was re-established. Wikipedia should be as correct as possible. It's easily verifiable that the company was re-established, so will be easy to have non-related individual see that and make the correction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bikeguy1 (talk • contribs) 13:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)